On the sixth day of debates still in slow motion on the pension reform in the Assembly, the deputies adopted Saturday, February 22 with the applause of the majority a first amendment to emphasize the role of family carers.
Declined identically by deputies from various quarters, the amendment adds to the general principles of the reform the consideration of carers in the solidarity objectives of the system “universal” of retirement. Secretary of State Laurent Pietraszewski said he was in favor, as did co-rapporteur Nicolas Turquois (MoDem), elected officials welcoming “a beautiful moment of consensus“.
The amendment, which had already had the green light in a special committee before, was adopted unanimously by 105 votes, to the standing applause of the majority and certain LRs. “Thank you for this enthusiasm“Said Sylvain Waserman (MoDem) to the roost.
Engaged in a “hellish ping pong»Since Monday, in the words of a centrist elected representative, the deputies were still examining article 1, with nearly 35,000 amendments to debate in total on the bill.
Faced with persistent blockage, opposition leaders including the rebellious Jean-Luc Mélenchon proposed to review the organization of the debates and move on to another article. But the majority, “not fooled“, Instead invited LFI and PCF to withdraw their slew of amendments.
“Frankly, if you wanted us to really go to the substantive titles (…), well let’s go, withdraw your sub-amendments once and for all and move on“, Launched the president of the special commission Brigitte Bourguignon (LREM).
General rapporteur Guillaume Gouffier Cha (LREM) also refused to debate the text “a bit like we want, like at the refreshment bar“. “You seem to realize the limits of the exercise you have been practicing for six days“Observed the minister in charge of Relations with the Parliament Marc Fesneau, opposing the idea of reorganizing the debates”As things progress“While the text is”organized into titles, articles“.
At the perch, Sylvain Waserman concluded that the option had been “clearly closed cleanly“.
While the majority already refer the responsibility for a possible 49-3 to the left of the left, Sébastien Jumel (PCF) judged that “after this episode“, she “can no longer take advantage of anything so as not to bear the responsibility of 49-3“.